Gaza Air War
which is why of course they get beaten time after time....................
And yet they never disappear, that ought to be a hint that the current strategy is not working. Gaza has been in a state of siege since 2007, perhaps offering the Palestinians hope instead of bullets my reduce the support for the militant groups.
The following 2 users liked this post by Ninthace:
I'm sure the Israelis would be more sympathetic to that viewpoint if the Palestinians didn't keep trying to murder them at every opportunity. (Note to mods, I'm answering a point that someone else raised).
The following 4 users liked this post by melmothtw:
What hope does Hamas offer? Their leaders and financiers, rich and safe in Qatar, send them to die in a militarily futile terrorist attack, caring nothing for casualties on either side. They are only interested in gaining wealth and political influence in the Arab world.
A polite reminder of what the topic of thread is supposed to be about as posted by Bob Viking who opened this thread as the Original Poster.
It is about the air war which started post the October 7th terrorist attack by Hamas terrorists operating from Gaza.
If you wish to argue politics or history there is a thread in Jet Blast that is where you should take those kinds of posts.
It is about the air war which started post the October 7th terrorist attack by Hamas terrorists operating from Gaza.
If you wish to argue politics or history there is a thread in Jet Blast that is where you should take those kinds of posts.
I have been reading the Gaza thread on Jetblast with interest but I figured if ever there was a use for a military aviation forum this was it.
Bearing in mind one side has F16s and F35s and the other side has powered hang gliders it’s a little asymmetric to say the least but can this be the place we discuss all matters related to air power in the conflict?
BV
Bearing in mind one side has F16s and F35s and the other side has powered hang gliders it’s a little asymmetric to say the least but can this be the place we discuss all matters related to air power in the conflict?
BV
The following 2 users liked this post by Chock Puller:
For those of you who do not know, in reference to a post that ORAC made:
The USS Mount Whitney (LCC-20) is a command and control ship. It used to be the Second Fleet flag ship. In 2005, when I was still on active duty, it replaced the USS Coronado as the Sixth Fleet flagship. (The USS Blue Ridge (LCC-19) is the similar ship for the US Seventh Fleet in the Pacific)
Aviation Content! It has a helicopter flight deck often used for VIP / Senior Officer transfers. I once dropped off a Destroyer Squadron commander (back in the 80's) on the Mount Whitney, during fleet exercises in the Carribean.
That's a bunch of ships and aircraft floating around in the Eastern Med, being ready for ... what? Good question. Same old thing as when I was in Sixth Fleet, in the 80's.
The USS Mount Whitney (LCC-20) is a command and control ship. It used to be the Second Fleet flag ship. In 2005, when I was still on active duty, it replaced the USS Coronado as the Sixth Fleet flagship. (The USS Blue Ridge (LCC-19) is the similar ship for the US Seventh Fleet in the Pacific)
Aviation Content! It has a helicopter flight deck often used for VIP / Senior Officer transfers. I once dropped off a Destroyer Squadron commander (back in the 80's) on the Mount Whitney, during fleet exercises in the Carribean.
On 18 October 2023, Mount Whitney deployed from Gaeta with the Commander 6th fleet, Vice Adm. Thomas Ishee, and his staff, onboard "in support of U.S. operations" in the eastern Mediterranean Sea in waters off the 2023 Israel–Hamas war. This added to new deployments by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69)aircraft carrier strike group and USS Bataan (LHD-5), USS Mesa Verde (LPD-19) and USS Carter Hall (LSD-50) carrying the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, joining the USS Gerald R. Ford strike group.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 20th Oct 2023 at 14:04.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Did a deployment on the Whitney for an exercise back in the ‘90s in the Bay of Biscay to help produce the daily ATO.
One of the worst couple of weeks of my life, it was stormy weather and she was built for amphibious ops and rolled like a pig the whole trip.
https://www.navalanalyses.com/2020/0...t-whitney.html
One of the worst couple of weeks of my life, it was stormy weather and she was built for amphibious ops and rolled like a pig the whole trip.
https://www.navalanalyses.com/2020/0...t-whitney.html
Pretty evident they're there to provide reassurance and, if necessary, back-up to the Israelis vis-a-vis the threat up north (i.e. a fairly big stick to keep Hezbollah honest).
Channel 4 news last night featured analysis by audio experts and munition experts - the assessment was that the 'Hamas' comms clip (supposedly two operatives discussing the missile launch going wrong and hitting the hospital) was so heavily doctored it could not be classified as evidence in any way and the doppler analysis of the missile (or whatever it was) arriving at the hospital showed it came from the North East and not the South West - this was backed up by munitions expert analysis of the impact crater and debris field.
The following users liked this post:
BBC does not agree with Channel 4 it would appear.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67144061
You have any sources the Channel 4 used as a basis for its content?
The linked article goes into some detail about BBC's effort to unravel the allegations.
As to arriving azimuth....errant rockets during the early stages of flight can make huge changes in direction.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67144061
You have any sources the Channel 4 used as a basis for its content?
The linked article goes into some detail about BBC's effort to unravel the allegations.
As to arriving azimuth....errant rockets during the early stages of flight can make huge changes in direction.
Last edited by SASless; 21st Oct 2023 at 13:59.
The following 2 users liked this post by SASless:
Indicating what exactly?
If correct:-
a) That the Israeli story that it was a missile launched from a site to the south-west of the hospital was not correct
b) That if it was an attack from the north-east it was probably an Israeli strike
Mogwis assessment was not definitive as he asked about which direction the solar panels were facing.
Channel 4 are normally pretty good with their fact checking.
42go - thanks, saved me the job of explaining the obvious.
Channel 4 are normally pretty good with their fact checking.
42go - thanks, saved me the job of explaining the obvious.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Mogwis assessment was not definitive as he asked about which direction the solar panels were facing.
Channel 4 are normally pretty good with their fact checking.
42go - thanks, saved me the job of explaining the obvious.
Channel 4 are normally pretty good with their fact checking.
42go - thanks, saved me the job of explaining the obvious.
Crab, Do you genuinely believe Channel 4 has superior sources, methods, and capabilities than do the IDF, French and American Intelligence services?
The following users liked this post:
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Mogwis assessment was not definitive as he asked about which direction the solar panels were facing.
Channel 4 are normally pretty good with their fact checking.
42go - thanks, saved me the job of explaining the obvious.
Channel 4 are normally pretty good with their fact checking.
42go - thanks, saved me the job of explaining the obvious.
Which way do solar panels in the northern hemisphere usually face?
Not so sure about Channel 4's objectivity on this. In the initial aftermath they reported the Israelis denial, immediately followed by a long litinue of occasions in the past (totally unrelated to the current events) in which it accused the Israelis of lying. Interestingly, not once did they even suggest that Hamas, the terrorists group that said it didn't kill civilians, might be less than honest.
As others have said, the BBC have come to a different conclusion.
Finally, I'd suggest that its up to those saying the Israelis did this to prove it rather then for them to disprove it.
The following users liked this post:
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Channel 4 news last night featured analysis by audio experts and munition experts - the assessment was that the 'Hamas' comms clip (supposedly two operatives discussing the missile launch going wrong and hitting the hospital) was so heavily doctored it could not be classified as evidence in any way and the doppler analysis of the missile (or whatever it was) arriving at the hospital showed it came from the North East and not the South West - this was backed up by munitions expert analysis of the impact crater and debris field.
The following users liked this post:
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The ballistic analysis carried out by CH4 was based on the missile following an unpowered and undisturbed flight from launch. The videos from various sources show the missile exploding in flight, presumably as the motor fails - the debris will then have fallen, if not directly downwards, in a variety of directions.
It should also be noted the same videos show the missile to be part of a salvo of 6 (the normal launcher load for R160 missiles) and all the others in the salvo are shown flying from SW to NE.
It should also be noted the same videos show the missile to be part of a salvo of 6 (the normal launcher load for R160 missiles) and all the others in the salvo are shown flying from SW to NE.